ronpaulfandomcom-20200215-history
Transcript Situation in Iraq and Impeachment
CSPAN December 16, 1998. A press conference with Ron Paul regarding the "Situation in Iraq and Impeachment." The video is available here =Transcript= Ron Paul: Not only is it annoying, I think its illegal. I think its unconstitutional. I think it's an act of war, and I think its much worse than anything we've considered under the impeachment resolutions. I have a prepared statement for tomorrow, and in that statement I talk about a much more serious act that the President committed than anything we've generally talked about. And that was the illegal bombing of Sudan and Afghanistan. For political reasons, 200 million dollars were spent for that. Without congressional approval. It was a cynical way of directing attention away from the President onto what he was doing in foreign policy. Unfortunately though, it meets no resistance because too many on our side of the isle like to drop bombs, and I think thats wrong. Theres been a lot of talk about the Constitution in the last several weeks and the last several months. A lot of people holding up the Constitution but I'd like them to read the Constitution, everybody in Congress, to read the Constitution about committing acts of war, and we wouldn't be doing this. And I beg and plead that our leadership not get distracted from what they're doing because of this. This to me is an outrage. And we shouldn't be participating in it. We should not permit our President to do this. It's very dangerous. It has nothing to do with national security. Matter of fact, our national security is more jeopardized by permitting this to happen. Because we're liable to start a war. We're liable to have our military men killed. We're liable to have more attacks on us by terrorists, because we're inviting these. There's just a bit of irony that our President can hide behind the military. A president that is not held in high esteem by the military, and he has never held the military in high esteem and avoided it, and now he uses the military to hide behind. I think this is atrocious. I think it shouldn't be permitted. We should speak out. But the important reason is, that this act, this act of committing war, whether its a Republican or Democratic President, is wrong. War should only be fought with the consensus of the people through the Congress. And yet in these later years, in the last several decades, we have been too willing to allow our Presidents to do this. So I urge our Republican leadership especially, and I will at the conference, not to go along with this, and not to give the endorsement that the President is looking for. Because he's hiding behind this, it's very dangerous, it has nothing to do with national security. Reporter: What kind of signal has the leadership sent you as for the next step in the impeachment? Ron Paul: The only thing we've heard about what the leadership might do has been from the television. The official remarks from our leadership is that nothing has been changed. But it would be fully discussed at our conference tonight, on what might happen. And I hope that I'll have the opportunity to voice my opinion, because I feel very strongly about it, and I am convinced that the American people aren't looking for a war under these circumstances. Reporter: Congressman, this morning, Chairman Hyde suggested that if military action were to begin, that it would just be logical to pause and take a break from the impeachment proceedings. I take it that you disagree with that. What can the Congress do given the situation? Ron Paul: I think it would be logical to stop the bombing. To suspend the bombing. There's no threat. We're going to do more harm by doing this. So the logic is, stop the bombing, and not endorse what the President is doing. Reporter: Congressman, if Congress were given an opportunity to vote on whether to bomb Iraq, would you go along with that, as long as it went through the procedures? Ron Paul: No I would strongly oppose it because they are not a threat to our national security. Iraq has a third rate army, they have no ability to wage war. Our policies are deliberately destroying the country. They can't feed their children. They're not allowed to have medication, there was a story in today's paper where one of our private charity groups was being fined because it was trying to bring medicines in to the Iraqi people. So for us to unleash bombs on Iraq at this particular time to kill more innocent people for political narrow reasons, no there is absolutely no need to cause more bombing because of a very overall flawed foreign policy. This is a continuation of a policy we've had for quite a few decades, and we're still fighting the Persian Gulf War. I mean that's what we should be addressing. But I wish the Congress would address the unconstitutionality of President's waging war, that to me is a lot more serious than Monica Lewinsky, let me tell you. Reporter: How are you going to vote on impeachment? Ron Paul: I'll vote for impeachment. Reporter: For all four articles? Ron Paul: Yes, unenthusiastically because I think the charges are way too mild and not touching the issues I would like to touch. I for instance am not comfortable with the investigation. I don't like the way it was done, I don't like the special prosecutor, and their techniques, but I also detest, and I do not like the administration's invasion of our privacy, with the holding of 1000 FBI records in the white house. Those are the kinds of things that should have been investigated. We've omitted the serious charges. We've played around with games on this sex scandal, and here we as Republicans, our leadership too often endorses a foreign policy that gets the President off the hook, as they did, when the President bombs Sudan and Afghanistan. Reporter: If military action did start would you propose going ahead with the impeachment proceeding? Ron Paul: Yes, I would say go along with it if it's necessary, because he could keep the war going on for two years. So if you use the logic 'oh there is a war going on we shouldn't deal with what we're obligated to do', the longer the war lasts the longer the President stays. No, we shouldn't do that, we should do what we're supposed to do, and get it over with. Reporter: Were you suggesting, that if the President were to order an attack on Iraq, that you would support adding another article of impeachment? Ron Paul: Yes, matter of fact, I think waging war without Congressional approval is an impeachable act. They should not do this. It's clearly unconstitutional, but we have conditioned the Congress and the American people to the point where we allow our Presidents to do too much that they should never have been permitted to do. He has a precedent for what he's doing, but he doesn't have the moral authority, and he doesn't have the constitutional authority to do what he's doing. Reporter: If, as a follow up, if you attempted to do that, number one, do you think it would be found in order, meaning germane to the impeachment resolution, number two would you get any support? Ron Paul: No, well, I guess a clear answer to your question, is I would feel that way, and I might say it, but it would die from lack of support. No, it wouldn't go anywhere, because the leadership on both sides. I think another irony in all of this, this has to be a direct affront to the most solid base of the Democrats for Clinton. Those who detest war, those who have been anti war, those who have opposed bombing Iraq, are his hardest core liberal base, and they will be the most offended, and they should have serious thought about this President if he cares so little about their feelings that he's ready to flaunt it in their face and say `we don't care about what you think about us bombing Iraq even though you've gone to the mat for me to try to save my Presidency.` Why should they save his Presidency if he does exactly opposite of what they believe when it comes to dealing with countries like Iraq?